- Tags: Brasile, Brics, Cina, convergenza, crescita, crisi-economica, India, Russia, Sudafrica
- Un commento

(Credits: Epa/Nelson Ching)
Perché la Cina, che in genere preferisce mantenere un profilo molto basso nelle questioni internazionali che non intaccano i suoi interessi nazionali, è così attiva nel promuovere le iniziative dei Brics, tanto da arrivare a condannare insieme agli altri emergenti le decisioni della coalizione occidentale e i bombardamenti della Nato in Libia? Forse Pechino si aspetta qualcosa dalla cooperazione con quelle che potrebbero diventare le potenze del futuro?
Difficile rispondere, anche se è impossibile negare che da quando i paesi emergenti hanno dimostrato di essere più bravi di Europa e Stati Uniti ad affrontare e superare la crisi finanziaria iniziata nel 2008 la loro influenza politica è cresciuta tanto quanto quella economica.
Tra il 2001 e il 2010, gli scambi commerciali tra questi paesi sono significativamente aumentati. Il Brasile, ad esempio, ha sempre esportato la maggior parte delle materie prime di cui dispone negli Stati Uniti e in Europa. Ma da quando ha iniziato a vendere anche alla Cina gli equilibri sono cambiati. Anche perché Pechino offre a Brasilia una fonte di reddito in più, legata alla vendita di prodotti alimentari. E in questo modo è riuscita ad affermarsi come primo partner commerciale (56 miliardi di dollari).
Lo stesso vale per la Russia, che trova oggi il commercio con l’Asia molto più conveniente di quello con gli Stati Uniti e le Repubbliche ex-sovietiche. Ancora, India e Brasile puntano alla Cina per ottenere i finanziamenti necessari per realizzare importanti opere infrastrutturali, ma allo stesso tempo sono convinti che la forza dell’interdipendenza dei Brics permetterà loro di tenere sotto controllo l’eventuale -e pericolossissima- invasione di prodotti cinesi a basso prezzo capaci di spiazzare alcuni settori delle rispettive economie.
A queste condizioni, l’interesse dei paesi emergenti a rafforzare i propri legami diventa l’unica strada percorribile per diversificare i fattori di rischio e avere nuove opportunità. Del resto, il tasso di crescita medio di queste cinque nazioni supera l’8%, il doppio rispetto alla media mondiale del 4,1%.
- Venerdì 15 Aprile 2011
EURO SI O NO?
STRATEGIE E NUMERI DELLA BIG IPO
COME SI CALCOLA
LA CRISI IN CIFRE
FAME, DISOCCUPAZIONE, NUOVI POVERI
ECONOMIA 2.0
IL PIANO MONTI
LA RIFORMA: ARTICOLO 18, PROPOSTE, DIBATTITO
LA RIFORMA, I NUMERI, LE POLEMICHE
RIVOLUZIONE IN CORSO PER LA UE
START UP E IL NETWORK ITALIA-USA
APPLE - LUCI E OMBRE
FOTOGRAFIA EUROPEA 2012
IL GRAFICO DELLA SETTIMANA
VITE STRAORDINARIE
DIETRO LE QUINTE
IL MADE IN ITALY DI SUCCESSO










IL MEGLIO DEL 2011
G20 di Cannes: i protagonisti e le loro sfide






Commenti
Puoi lasciare un commento, oppure fare trackback dal tuo sito.
Il 21 Aprile 2011 alle 16:42 yahuwah ha scritto:
Billionaires Flourish, Inequalities Deepen as Economies “Recover”
by James Petras*
In this profile of global wealth accumulation, James Petras illustrates the direct link between the exponential increase of the U.S. super rich in recent years and the tanking real economy. Unsurprisingly, the prize for the fastest and most dramatic growth of new billionaires goes to the BRIC block countries - recently joined by South Africa - albeit to the great detriment of their working classes and environment.
BRIC’s: The New billionaires: Exploiting Labor of Nature
The leading emerging capitalist countries, Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) hailed by the mass media for their rapid growth over the past decade are producing billionaires at a faster rate than any bloc of countries in the world. According to the latest data in Forbes (March 2011), the number of billionaires in the BRICs increased over 56% from 193 in 2010 to 301 in 2011, exceeding that of Europe.
The high growth of the BRICs - has led to the concentration and centralization of capital, in every case promoted by state policies which provides low interest loans, subsidies, tax incentives, unrestricted exploitation of natural resources and labor, the dispossession of small property owners and the give-away of publically owned enterprises.
The dynamic growth of billionaires in the BRICs has led to the most egregious inequalities in the world. Among the BRICs, China leads the way with the greatest number of billionaires (115) and the worst inequalities in all of Asia, in sharp contrast to its Communist past when it was the most egalitarian country in the world. An examination of the source of wealth of China’s super rich reveals that it has resulted from the exploitation of labor in the manufacturing sector, speculation in real-estate and construction and trade. China has surpassed the US as the world’s biggest manufacturer in 2011, as a result of the super-exploitation of labor in China and the growth of parasitical financial capital in the US.
In contrast to the US, China’s working class is making significant inroads into the profiteering of its manufacturing and real estate elite. As a result of working class struggle, wages have been growing between 10% and 20% over the past 5 years; protests by farmers and urban households against state sanctioned evictions by real estate speculators have exceeded 100,000 per year.
The wealth of Russian billionaires on the other hand resulted from the violent theft of public resources (oil, gas, aluminum, iron, steel, etc.), developed by the previous Communist regime. The great majority of Russian billionaires depend on the export of commodities, pillaging and devastating the natural environment under a corrupt and deregulated regime. The contrast in living and working conditions between the western oriented billionaires and the Russian working class is largely the result of the siphoning off of wealth to overseas accounts, offshore investments and extraordinary personal luxuries including multi-million dollar real estate. In contrast to China’s industrial elite, Russia’s billionaires resemble the parasitical ‘rentiers’ found among Wall Street speculators and Persian Gulf sheiks.
India’s billionaires are a combination of old and new rich drawing their wealth by exploiting low wage industrial workers, dispossessing slum and tribal peoples, as well as from diversified holdings in real estate, IT and software. India’s billionaires accumulated their wealth through their class-kin linkages to the very corrupt higher echelons of the political class, securing monopolies via state contracts. India’s high growth over the past decade (averaging 7%) and the upsurge in billionaires upward to 55 by 2011, are both linked the neo-liberal policies of deregulation, privatization and globalization, which have concentrated wealth at the top, undermined small scale producers and dispossessed tens of millions.
Brazil’s billionaire class has expanded rapidly, especially under the leadership of the Workers Party, to 29, up from single digits a decade earlier. Today over two-thirds of Latin America’s billionaires are Brazilians. The centerpiece of Brazil’s super rich wealth is the financial-banking sector which has benefited enormously from the monetary, fiscal and neo-liberal policies of the Lula Da Silva regime. Billionaire bankers have been the principle beneficiaries of the agro-mineral export economy which has flourished over the past decade, at the expense of the manufacturing sector. Despite claims by Workers Party leaders, the class inequalities between the mass of minimum wage workers ($380 per month as of March 2011) and the super-rich continues to be worst in Latin America. An analysis of the source of wealth among Brazilian billionaires reveals that 60% accrued their wealth in the finance, real estate and insurance (FIRE) sector and only one (3%) in the capital or intermediary maufacturing sector.
Brazil’s boom in economic growth and billionaires fits the profile of a ‘colonial economy’: heavy in conspicuous consumption, commodity exports and presided over by a dominant financial sector which promotes neo-liberal policies. Over the course of the past decade despite the populist political theatrics and paternalistic poverty-programs sponsored by the “center-left” Workers Party, the major socio-economic outcome has been the growth of a class of “super-rich” billionaires concentrated in banking with powerful links to the agro-mineral sectors. The free-market high growth financial-agro-mineral class has degraded the manufacturing sector, especially textiles and shoes, as well as capital and intermediary goods producers.
The BRICs are producing more, and growing faster than the established imperial powers in Europe and the US but they are also producing monstrous inequalities and concentrations of wealth. The socio-economic consequences have already manifested themselves in increasing class conflict especially in China and India, as intensive exploitation and dispossession have provoked mass action.
The Chinese political elite seems to be the most conscious of the political threat posed by the growing concentration of wealth and is in the midst of promoting substantial wage increases and greater local consumption which seems to be lowering profit margins among some sectors of the manufacturing elite. Perhaps the ‘historical memory’ of the “cultural revolution’ and the Maoist legacy plays a role in alerting the political elite to the political dangers resulting from “capitalist excesses” associated with the high levels of exploitation and the rapid growth of a class of politically connected kinship based billionaires.
James Petras is a Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York. He is the author of 64 books translated in 29 languages and has published over 2000 articles. His most recent book: Global Depression and Regional Wars, Clarity Press (2009)
Devi aver fatto log-in per inserire un commento.